Welcome to the Piano World Piano ForumsOver 2.5 million posts about pianos, digital pianos, and all types of keyboard instruments
Join the World's Largest Community of Piano Lovers
(it's free)
It's Fun to Play the Piano ... Please Pass It On!

Note repeat speed means how fast the keys will move. McCoy is using the 4 note motif extensively and in different inversions.

I suppose this is a semantics issue. 'Key' repetition is so often used to describe Grand vs. Upright behavior (playing the same note).

So obviously you're not talking about that.

But just an observation: My teacher has a very heavily weighted Yamaha S6. He plays very fast on it. He likes it heavy.

After playing Chopin 10/1 for many months here, it doesn't seem to matter to me either whether the keys are heavy or light. At least I haven't noticed it. (I'm typically playing it at 120 -- which is equivalent to 240bpm in jazz).

I was trying to play 'Ambleside' today, a great tune by John TaylorKind of a British giant steps with a sequence that modulates in major thirds and augmented harmony to boot. Fiendishly difficult.You can see it here if you likehttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CfTFa7H_Eb8

What a beatiful tune and rendition! My kind of jazz. It really did have a John Taylor kind of feel. I've never heard this before (perhaps my John Taylor collection is rather measley -- limited selection in iTunes before).

Now I observe that when you're playing fast lines your hand pretty much stays put. (That was my question from earlier and it seemed to be answered).

Beeboss, nice playing on Ambleside. As always, I like your approach. I'm not familiar with John Taylor but I checked out a few things on YouTube... stuff we can see here anyway. I like his style. Any particular disc of his that you would recommend?

Thanks ScottJohn Taylor has made many many wonderful albums as leader and also appears on many others by other leaders, notably Kenny Wheeler. I would recommend 'Angel of the presence' as one of his best trio cds. Also, if you dig the ecm chamber jazz vibe then 'Azimuth 85' is outstanding for my tastes. If you like Kenny Wheeler then 'double doubleyou' and about a dozen others are incredible.

Beeboss, John Taylor's style is similar to my teacher's so I naturally gravitate towards that. Thanks for the specific recommendation. When I was on a lookout for his CD's a couple of years back, there was a limited selection on iTunes.

I may have asked this before but who else do you know plays in this style? I call it 'pianistic jazz' (lots of subtlety in piano).

I'm in the mood for sharing too. I've been thinking about what Gyro has advised to new jazz improvisers on many, many threads about 'digging in' and just improvising, not letting theory get in the way, etc. On some of those threads I, or others have stepped in and said that it's a bit more difficult than that, especially if you want to sound like you're playing jazz. However, I've always thought that what he says has always held a grain of truth. If one wants to improvise, then just do so.

Well, what follows is me improvising, digging in, and not letting any particular tune guide my playing. This is after playing lots of Wayne Shorter and Billy Strayhorn tunes, and thinking lots about half/whole dim scale stuff.

Very cool scep! I've always enjoyed playing like this but haven't ever really stuck to it as an approach... not sure why. I guess I'm still preoccupied with being able to play "correctly", whatever that is . But I definitely think what you're doing is interesting to listen to. It's free, but still has stuff to latch on to. Have you listened to Denny Zeitlin? I just picked up one of his solo piano cd's "Precipice" and he plays alot like this. I think of it as "free with direction".

Sceptical that was excellent. great playing. For a kind of free improvisation it hangs together really well, the bits all lead towards the next bit, which is thing that I always find had about free impo.I agree with you about the gyro approach as well. Theory is good but only if it aids interesting playing. We gotta dig in and play what we feel and let the theory move to the background otherwise we are just playing music by numbers.

Scott, also great playing there. So many good ideas in those pieces. I especially like the second one, really melodic, sounds, and you are open to going wherever it takes you. It could have gone on longer for me.

Very cool scep! I've always enjoyed playing like this but haven't ever really stuck to it as an approach... not sure why. I guess I'm still preoccupied with being able to play "correctly", whatever that is . But I definitely think what you're doing is interesting to listen to. It's free, but still has stuff to latch on to. Have you listened to Denny Zeitlin? I just picked up one of his solo piano cd's "Precipice" and he plays alot like this. I think of it as "free with direction".

Hey thanks, Scott. I haven't yet listened to Denny yet, but thanks for that lead. I'll check him out tonight.

I always feel like after doing this that the main thing that holds me back is having more vocabulary and better technique.

Scott, I really like the second improv alot. Some very cool exploration of chords and the different ways they can fit together. The first one was good too, and reminded me of Monk for the first half or so. I suppose the second one was more interesting in that like Beeboss said it went in some interesting directions, and you capable of going in those directions.

I also agree with your comment about what holds one back in playing improv is technique. I wish I could play all of the things that I think I can play. As it happens (and can be heard on my recordings) my technique gets shaky when I try things that aren't necessarily under my fingers in that I'm also trying to really improvise rather than fall back on fingerings and phrases that I might be comfortable with.

Sceptical that was excellent. great playing. For a kind of free improvisation it hangs together really well, the bits all lead towards the next bit, which is thing that I always find had about free impo.I agree with you about the gyro approach as well. Theory is good but only if it aids interesting playing. We gotta dig in and play what we feel and let the theory move to the background otherwise we are just playing music by numbers.

Scep -- I listened to part of it earlier it sounded SO SO good. But I was interrupted and am still catching up. I'm about to leave for vacation so Scott and Scep, I'll complete the task of listening tomorrow.

Scep - like I said earlier, I thought was really good. Now listening to it a second time, it really is some sophisticated work. I liked that you stayed in a progression long enough for it to sink in. The LH stuff was very interesting. I've never heard you mix up the hands like this before.

There was not a boring moment in there. And I don't know what technical deficiencies you claim to have. In this kind of setting I don't hear any. Swinging too even at the blistering tempos.

It may be free form but it felt structured somehow. I didn't feel like you were going so randomly.

Scep - like I said earlier, I thought was really good. Now listening to it a second time, it really is some sophisticated work. I liked that you stayed in a progression long enough for it to sink in. The LH stuff was very interesting. I've never heard you mix up the hands like this before.

There was not a boring moment in there. And I don't know what technical deficiencies you claim to have. In this kind of setting I don't hear any. Swinging too even at the blistering tempos.

It may be free form but it felt structured somehow. I didn't feel like you were going so randomly.

Just a few comments: the deficiencies I'm referring to are basically when the timing is off for some of the fast runs because what I'm hearing (or thinking that I'm hearing) isn't being exactly translated into the fingers. Or sometimes a finger lands on a note I wasn't expecting and then it throws my brain off for a split second and I have to recalibrate the rest of the run in relation to the 'wrong' note and the rhythm gets shaky. It's something I'm trying to work on more and more. I guess this is to say that I do believe there is such a thing as a wrong note, and that when I play one it affects me.

As for it being free form, I'm also not sure it is best to think of it as being without form. I suppose when one sits down to do this type of improv one needs to have some ideas that are generated on the spot, and then use those (expand/contrast/stretch/modulate/etc) to make an instant tune. Sometimes it's more successful than others, depending on my ability to stick with the ideas (or try to remember them half way through the improv as is more my case).

On a side note, I'm still working on Very Early these days. I think I'm finally beginning to understand it.

Also, Beeboss, I asked a long time ago for some interesting tunes that you were playing, and I've been playing with 'A Flower is a Lovesome Thing' since you suggested it. I'd love to hear your solo piano version of it, or anyone else that would care to learn it. Quite a cool tune.

Just a few comments: the deficiencies I'm referring to are basically when the timing is off for some of the fast runs because what I'm hearing (or thinking that I'm hearing) isn't being exactly translated into the fingers. Or sometimes a finger lands on a note I wasn't expecting and then it throws my brain off for a split second and I have to recalibrate the rest of the run in relation to the 'wrong' note and the rhythm gets shaky. It's something I'm trying to work on more and more. I guess this is to say that I do believe there is such a thing as a wrong note, and that when I play one it affects me.

I know exactly what you mean. It is hard to really believe that the listener can't really hear this stuff but I think it is true. How could they know what you 'think you are hearing'?So, with that in mind, probably best not to worry about that stuff. Maybe don't think of them as 'wrong' notes but rather as 'unintended' notes. Sometimes for the listener these are the best bits. Now I think about it I am not sure they can even be 'unintended' notes, I mean some part of your brain or muscles have made those notes happen despite your conscious mind feeling they are 'wrong'. They are only 'wrong' in the sense that they throw off your timing or focus, I am still working on a way to make that not happen.

Originally Posted By: scepticalforumguy

Also, Beeboss, I asked a long time ago for some interesting tunes that you were playing, and I've been playing with 'A Flower is a Lovesome Thing' since you suggested it. I'd love to hear your solo piano version of it, or anyone else that would care to learn it. Quite a cool tune.

I kind of forgot about that tune, so many other things to work on ;-)I haven't got a chart for it so its in the 'to be transcribed' pile. But now you have reminded me I shall try to have a look at it. It is a great tune.Lets hear your version.

I like to call them surprise notes and they do sound good, they add unexpected spice (tension) to the story. Sceptical, maybe you are being to critical of yourself?

Surprise notes or not, they seem to generate a reflex action in my brain and my fingers will still have to compensate for the unexpected turn of events. So I'm not sure I'm being too critical, but just discerning.

Also, Beeboss, and Jazz+, I think for me it is becoming increasingly important for me to stay true to my ear rather than my technique (or lack thereof) when trying to play, and this is something that I've been coming to terms with over the last few years. Some things are VERY easy for me to play while many others are not, and in the past I stuck to those easy things at the expense of musicality. I also didn't force myself to consider other musical possibilities since it would have made me feel bad about all the things I couldn't do. So, being too caught up in wanting to satisfy my ego, I only did things that I could do, and was ignorantly happy in the process.

It's only been in the last few years that I've had the ability to really look at what I'm doing, and try to critically evaluate it, and then to work on the deficiencies. I think I'm much happier now in this process, rather than the former, simply because I feel that I'm improving and am much more open to further growth. Ignorance may be bliss, but it's not great to listen to.

Just a few comments: the deficiencies I'm referring to are basically when the timing is off for some of the fast runs because what I'm hearing (or thinking that I'm hearing) isn't being exactly translated into the fingers...

I know exactly what you mean. It is hard to really believe that the listener can't really hear this stuff but I think it is true. How could they know what you 'think you are hearing'?So, with that in mind, probably best not to worry about that stuff. Maybe don't think of them as 'wrong' notes but rather as 'unintended' notes. Sometimes for the listener these are the best bits.

Yes, true enough. Mistakes are often (wrongly) confused with genius, freshness or innovation. I'm still not convinced Miles Davis, for example intended some of the stuff he's recorded. For example, there's a few stray notes in Blue in Green that I'm certain he's just hit the wrong fingering or partial, and people take that as hip or outside. It seems that the more modern recordings one listens to less and less of these types of notes are tolerated. I'm not sure what I prefer.

Originally Posted By: beeboss

Now I think about it I am not sure they can even be 'unintended' notes, I mean some part of your brain or muscles have made those notes happen despite your conscious mind feeling they are 'wrong'. They are only 'wrong' in the sense that they throw off your timing or focus, I am still working on a way to make that not happen.

Well, as I wrote in the above post, the problem for me stems from the reconciliation of what my ear is seeking as opposed to the hands. I'm sure I could record hours of music with no shaky bits if I was deaf, and was encouraged to play what I thought was good music. I'm also sure that I'd have lots of alternate scale notes, funky chords and 'challenging' voicings. But I don't think you're really talking about that extreme though. It's the confidence to move forward when faced with an unexpected challenge that is what is often necessary, and yes, I still have to hone that skill.

How about this: If you were to write music, and if you had the magical ability to write as fast as you could play would everything you played be what you intended to write? Would this even be possible? I think choices made in an instant should be as wise as those made with more time, especially if the intention is to produce decent music. I guess this is why improvising attracts me so much because of the search for the 'right' notes at an accelerated pace.

Surprise notes or not, they seem to generate a reflex action in my brain and my fingers will still have to compensate for the unexpected turn of events. So I'm not sure I'm being too critical, but just discerning.

Yes I know what you mean, but the time to evaluate whether a note was a good one or not is not whilst playing. Otherwise you are focusing all your attention on the slightly weird note you just played and what is coming next is not getting the preparation required. Thats when the time or focus slips. I know only too well though that it is not easy to not think about it.

Originally Posted By: scepticalforumguy

It's the confidence to move forward when faced with an unexpected challenge that is what is often necessary, and yes, I still have to hone that skill.

We all do. I am always amazed when I listen to Jarrett because although he may make the odd slip or something comes out that obviously wasn't really intended it doesn't impede the flow one little bit. When I make a mistake I can be pretty sure that another one is coming right up.

Originally Posted By: scepticalforumguy

It's only been in the last few years that I've had the ability to really look at what I'm doing, and try to critically evaluate it, and then to work on the deficiencies. I think I'm much happier now in this process, rather than the former, simply because I feel that I'm improving and am much more open to further growth. Ignorance may be bliss, but it's not great to listen to.

That is definitely the way to move forward.

Originally Posted By: scepticalforumguy

How about this: If you were to write music, and if you had the magical ability to write as fast as you could play would everything you played be what you intended to write? Would this even be possible? I think choices made in an instant should be as wise as those made with more time, especially if the intention is to produce decent music. I guess this is why improvising attracts me so much because of the search for the 'right' notes at an accelerated pace.

It's a different thing in a way. When composing out of time there is plenty of scope to make the note choice what you really really want but the flip side is that it is very hard to imagine how it will sound when played in real time to an ear that has never heard it before. So often when I compose stuff and then listen to it back it is so obvious where should be a change and isn't (or vice versa) but I can't get that by thinking about the bits in isolation. When improvising the ear compels you to do something when it is getting dull or to slow down if its going too fast.

I was having a go at 'flower is a lovesome thing' - thanks for reminding of it's existence. I love it, a wonderful tune. I recorded a quick version, more of a play through than a performance, but you can hear the ideas I am thinking of despite the hesitancy.

Scep, I like everything you post! Not true comment at all. But in the past we were supposed to critique and maybe for you that overpowered everything else. So please correct that notion. I just had fun debating with you particularly on subs. Frankly I miss those debates because that's when I really learn.

As you know, I don't particularly care if people think I play something badly. I already know it anyway and if I keep posting then the next one is naturally better. I'm more excited about learning and that comes to me via critique.

BTW - I do think that in this free format, you sound really in control of the rhythm. Maybe that's interesting in itself. Perhaps thinking about the form causes the rhythmic flow to be impeded. Particularly for you when you are doing a lot of 16ths. You really sounded good though and swinging.

I myself am not at the point of thinking 16ths ala Keith Jarrett. I'm finding a lot of musicality by going the opposite and slowing down. I notice that a lot of players start off with eighths and quarters and only pound on the sixteenths when they peak out.

When I'm playing sixteenths, it tends to be influenced a lot by muscle memory and pre-practiced runs. So I am avoiding that by making 16ths very short. That way, a pattern cannot develop.

I'm not at the point that I can play with such confidence on the free stuff as what you did so I find it particularly impressive.

Surprise notes or not, they seem to generate a reflex action in my brain and my fingers will still have to compensate for the unexpected turn of events. So I'm not sure I'm being too critical, but just discerning.

Originally Posted By: beeboss

Yes I know what you mean, but the time to evaluate whether a note was a good one or not is not whilst playing. Otherwise you are focusing all your attention on the slightly weird note you just played and what is coming next is not getting the preparation required. Thats when the time or focus slips. I know only too well though that it is not easy to not think about it.

I guess the problem for me is that I'm reacting to the note rather than evaluating, kind of like when one tastes something sour--it's not an evaluative process as much as a puckering. If I was trying to smile at the time I'm still not sure I could keep smiling during the sourness episode.

Of course there are degrees of 'wrong' notes, and it appears that if something is only slightly off the reaction may be one of surprise rather than distain, and may lead to other more interesting things.

Originally Posted By: scepticalforumguy

It's the confidence to move forward when faced with an unexpected challenge that is what is often necessary, and yes, I still have to hone that skill.

Originally Posted By: beeboss

We all do. I am always amazed when I listen to Jarrett because although he may make the odd slip or something comes out that obviously wasn't really intended it doesn't impede the flow one little bit. When I make a mistake I can be pretty sure that another one is coming right up.

So I guess this is what people mean that say there are no wrong notes. At the level of mastery perhaps a vision of the whole work, or perhaps even a night of playing, is looked at in its entirety, and the one misplaced note takes on some sort of greater significance as you talked about earlier. I just know that I'm not there yet, and have a long way to go before I can look at the broad picture again. But like I said, I'm enjoying the journey, so the destination isn't really as important to me right now.

Originally Posted By: scepticalforumguy

How about this: If you were to write music, and if you had the magical ability to write as fast as you could play would everything you played be what you intended to write?...

Originally Posted By: beeboss

It's a different thing in a way. When composing out of time there is plenty of scope to make the note choice what you really really want but the flip side is that it is very hard to imagine how it will sound when played in real time to an ear that has never heard it before.

That's interesting. I was actually referring to composing with a piano, or some other tool, rather than just by ear. I've yet to do that with more than just melodies and simple harmonies.

Originally Posted By: beeboss

I was having a go at 'flower is a lovesome thing' - thanks for reminding of it's existence. I love it, a wonderful tune. I recorded a quick version, more of a play through than a performance, but you can hear the ideas I am thinking of despite the hesitancy.

And what a great play through. I like the groove thing that you go into on many of your pieces, but am always disappointed when you also fade out right when it gets going. The block chords you use (or whatever you call them) are really very cool too. I've been trying to copy you in this regard from some of the last things you've posted. It's a great sound, but sometimes pretty hard to execute, especially when the chords are so dense.

Also, I've yet to hear the tune anywhere except for your performance, so I was quite surprised by some of your chords and definitely surprised by the tempo. Is it this slow? This is one of the few tunes that I've learned recently from the Real Book, and so I have no idea as to the authenticity or the tempo. The Youtube examples didn't really inspire me to listen to more than a few minutes, and I couldn't find anything that might've been more 'accurate.' So, given my lack of exposure to others' versions my own is actually quite fast compared to yours. I've also taken liberties with the B7lydian chord for the first four bars. I'll try to post something tonight or tomorrow if I have the chance.

And what a great play through. I like the groove thing that you go into on many of your pieces, but am always disappointed when you also fade out right when it gets going.

Thanks. The groovy solo wasn't really happening so I cut it out. I need to play on those chords for a while before it will be relaxed.

Originally Posted By: scepticalforumguy

Also, I've yet to hear the tune anywhere except for your performance, so I was quite surprised by some of your chords and definitely surprised by the tempo. Is it this slow?

Normally it is the speed of a regular ballad but I tried it more spacey and out of time. I had more time to find the chords that way ;-) Next time it may be faster.

Originally Posted By: scepticalforumguy

The Youtube examples didn't really inspire me to listen to more than a few minutes, and I couldn't find anything that might've been more 'accurate.' So, given my lack of exposure to others' versions my own is actually quite fast compared to yours.

I hadn't really checked out any other versions of it either but there are plenty up on youtube. I just had a quick listen and it seems that the chords in real book 2 are not quite the ones that are usually used. I need to try a few of the possibilities and think a little about which I like best, should have done that before recording it really. I like to find the oldest version I can to try to know what the 'authentic' chords are and then listen to a few more recent versions to see what it common practice for modern players and then take the bits I like.

Originally Posted By: scepticalforumguy

I've also taken liberties with the B7lydian chord for the first four bars.